4 ms·

If you count New York Times as mainstream then plenty of times. For example https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/10/16/pentagon-payment-afghanistan-drone/

If you count New York Times as mainstream then plenty of times. For example https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/10/16/pentagon-payment-afghanistan-drone/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/10/16/pentagon-pay... https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/world/middleeast/11casualties.html https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/world/middleeast/11casual... https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/16/magazine/uncounted-civilian-casualties-iraq-airstrikes.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/16/magazine/unco... https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/18/us/airstrikes-pentagon-records-civilian-deaths.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/18/us/airstrikes... Although I agree there was no real punishment, after all the US isn't going to charge their own soldiers unless they can find hard evidence it was done on purpose because it would disincentivise them from doing their work, at best they could hope for some payment from the US, that did happen on the odd occasion, no where nearly as much I doubt as they would have received if they killed someone domestically like that though.

ajsnigrutin 4y ago
NY times is behind a paywall for me, but even the first story mentions a "mistake"... somehow when americans kill someone, it's "a mistake". The other stories are from (judging by the URLs) from 2006, 2017 and 2021... so yeah... considering america is still in quite a few countries now, and noone cares. > because it would disincentivise them from doing their work You mean "making mistakes" and killing civilians? Why can't EU impose sanctions on US? Like kick them out of the EU teritory as a start? USA even bombed a couple of weddings in pakistan... and they aren't even at war with pakistan. And let's not forget what happens when US kills a reuters journalist... they go after the whistleblower of course, and the website operator that published the video. Look, we all know russians are bad, but for many more countries america is the "number one risk and enemy", and even at this moment, many more countries are occupied by US army than by the russians. If we (the europeans) don't mind americans destroying countries all around the world, even bombing some in europe (yugoslavia 1999, similar reasons to what putin is doing now), why are we destroying our own economies now, when the russians are doing it? The only ones having any benefit out of this current crisis are the american politicians... EU economy is fucked, russian economy is fucked, and Biden is taking the taxpayers money, giving it to Zelensky, so zelensky can buy weapons from bidens buddies, who (probably) give a percentage back to biden (or whoever his handler is). Oh, and also china for getting cheap oil an gas from russia.
- throwrqX 4y ago
  I used though links because those were the first ones that came up when I searched. If you want another here is one from Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/coalition-airstrikes-isis-civilian-death-toll/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/coalition... I must question how hard you are looking because none of these links have shown paywalls to me, and even if they did you could use reader view (depends on browser) or various archive services to see what was written. If you want articles from specific date periods you can use Google search date parameters. > You mean "making mistakes" and killing civilians? No, from doing any sort of military activity. If you wanted to 100% verify there is no potential civilian nearby any military activity would immediately grind to a halt. You'll find for similar reasons why few Nazi German soldiers were ever punished for killing civilians, because even the Allies understood is it something almost impossible to accuse your enemy of without it also applying to your own soldiers, thus most trials focused on purposeful targeting of civilians, which is something different. > Why can't EU impose sanctions on US? EU has put sanctions on the US for various things over the years. > Like kick them out of the EU teritory as a start? Because it would mean they actually have to pay for their own defense which none of them are particularly keen on doing. > US kills a reuters journalist... If you watch the actual video it's pretty clear the men the journalists are with are carrying weapons, if I remember correctly an RPG. Militarily speaking they were entirely a legitimate target and I personally never understood the controversy about it, perhaps because they worked for a western news organization it became famous. If you wanted to pick an example of them killing civilians who weren't hanging around with militants there are many better ones. > similar reasons to what putin is doing now There was no genocide of Russian speakers in Ukraine so that's nonsense. > The only ones having any benefit out of this current crisis are the american politicians. This is also obvious nonsense. How are high gas prices and high inflation rates beneficial to American politicians? The Russian economy is doing (for now at least) far better than the American or EU ones. If you look at what was actually given, half of it is given under lend-lease, which as the name suggests, is a lease, they're not actually buying anything that they have to pay back. The US is buying them from whatever companies and then lending them out to Ukraine. If you read the law passed for it, the US expects no compensation for any loss of military equipment given to Ukraine, only that whatever is left is returned when the war finished. Instead of spouting conspiracy nonsense you should actually go and learn up on what you criticize because it's very common that people talk all this stuff about things they don't understand at all. I do agree though that China and India are big beneficiaries from this being able to buy things from Russia at big discounts though.

ajsnigrutin 4y ago

NY times is behind a paywall for me, but even the first story mentions a "mistake"... somehow when americans kill someone, it's "a mistake". The other stories are from (judging by the URLs) from 2006, 2017 and 2021... so yeah... considering america is still in quite a few countries now, and noone cares. > because it would disincentivise them from doing their work You mean "making mistakes" and killing civilians? Why can't EU impose sanctions on US? Like kick them out of the EU teritory as a start? USA even bombed a couple of weddings in pakistan... and they aren't even at war with pakistan. And let's not forget what happens when US kills a reuters journalist... they go after the whistleblower of course, and the website operator that published the video. Look, we all know russians are bad, but for many more countries america is the "number one risk and enemy", and even at this moment, many more countries are occupied by US army than by the russians. If we (the europeans) don't mind americans destroying countries all around the world, even bombing some in europe (yugoslavia 1999, similar reasons to what putin is doing now), why are we destroying our own economies now, when the russians are doing it? The only ones having any benefit out of this current crisis are the american politicians... EU economy is fucked, russian economy is fucked, and Biden is taking the taxpayers money, giving it to Zelensky, so zelensky can buy weapons from bidens buddies, who (probably) give a percentage back to biden (or whoever his handler is). Oh, and also china for getting cheap oil an gas from russia.

throwrqX 4y ago
I used though links because those were the first ones that came up when I searched. If you want another here is one from Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/coalition-airstrikes-isis-civilian-death-toll/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/coalition... I must question how hard you are looking because none of these links have shown paywalls to me, and even if they did you could use reader view (depends on browser) or various archive services to see what was written. If you want articles from specific date periods you can use Google search date parameters. > You mean "making mistakes" and killing civilians? No, from doing any sort of military activity. If you wanted to 100% verify there is no potential civilian nearby any military activity would immediately grind to a halt. You'll find for similar reasons why few Nazi German soldiers were ever punished for killing civilians, because even the Allies understood is it something almost impossible to accuse your enemy of without it also applying to your own soldiers, thus most trials focused on purposeful targeting of civilians, which is something different. > Why can't EU impose sanctions on US? EU has put sanctions on the US for various things over the years. > Like kick them out of the EU teritory as a start? Because it would mean they actually have to pay for their own defense which none of them are particularly keen on doing. > US kills a reuters journalist... If you watch the actual video it's pretty clear the men the journalists are with are carrying weapons, if I remember correctly an RPG. Militarily speaking they were entirely a legitimate target and I personally never understood the controversy about it, perhaps because they worked for a western news organization it became famous. If you wanted to pick an example of them killing civilians who weren't hanging around with militants there are many better ones. > similar reasons to what putin is doing now There was no genocide of Russian speakers in Ukraine so that's nonsense. > The only ones having any benefit out of this current crisis are the american politicians. This is also obvious nonsense. How are high gas prices and high inflation rates beneficial to American politicians? The Russian economy is doing (for now at least) far better than the American or EU ones. If you look at what was actually given, half of it is given under lend-lease, which as the name suggests, is a lease, they're not actually buying anything that they have to pay back. The US is buying them from whatever companies and then lending them out to Ukraine. If you read the law passed for it, the US expects no compensation for any loss of military equipment given to Ukraine, only that whatever is left is returned when the war finished. Instead of spouting conspiracy nonsense you should actually go and learn up on what you criticize because it's very common that people talk all this stuff about things they don't understand at all. I do agree though that China and India are big beneficiaries from this being able to buy things from Russia at big discounts though.